Scenario and Sensitivity Design Review
Check that scenarios are coherent and informative.
The Open buttons send the prompt text as currently shown below to that site only when you click. Fill in the placeholders first.
Review the scenarios in my financial model. Model purpose and decision: [MODEL_PURPOSE]. Key assumptions and the scenarios defined (base, upside, downside): [SCENARIO_DEFINITIONS]. Results by scenario: [SCENARIO_RESULTS]. Score each criterion from 1 to 5 with reasons: 1. Scenarios are internally coherent (assumptions that move together actually would together). 2. The downside scenario is plausible and painful enough to matter, not a token 5 percent change. 3. Drivers varied are the ones that drive the outcome; list the top three drivers I might be missing. 4. Ranges are justified by data or stated judgement. 5. Scenarios are described in words, not just numbers. 6. One-at-a-time sensitivity: a tornado-style table of the effect of changing each driver by plus and minus 10 percent. 7. Combined stress test. 8. Break-even and trigger points are identified (the value of the driver at which the decision changes). 9. Scenario switch is implemented transparently and easy to audit. 10. Results are communicated with decisions, not just outputs. Return a scorecard, a recommended set of three scenarios with narrative, the sensitivity table layout with formulas, and a list of mistakes I made. Do not invent numbers; use mine.
Fill in before use
Optional: type your details and the prompt above updates. Nothing is saved or sent.
Replace each bracketed placeholder with your own details, then paste into Any AI or another assistant.